Bail Matters

SRI DASAIAH AND SMT. RATHNAMMAVs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

KARNATAKA HIGH COURT

SINGLE BENCH

( Before : Aravind Kumar, J )

SRI DASAIAH AND SMT. RATHNAMMA — Appellant

Vs.

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA — Respondent

Criminal Petition No. 3788 of 2011

Decided on : 05-08-2011

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Section 302

Counsel for Appearing Parties

A.M. Balaji and B.M. Mohan Kumar, for the Appellant; B. Raja Subrahmanya Bhat, HCGP, for the Respondent

ORDER

Aravind Kumar, J.—Petitioners 1 and 2 are arraigned as accused No. 1 and 2 in Crime No. 398/2009 by Hassan Town Police for offence punishable u/s 302 of Indian Penal Code is before this Court seeking for being enlarged on bail.

2. Case of the prosecution is that deceased is the husband of second Petitioner and she had an illicit relationship with the first Petitioner and inspite of repeated requests by the deceased to his wife not to indulge in such activity it did not yield any fruitful result and villagers had also advised both the Petitioners i.e., 1 and 2 not to indulge in such activity for which both the Petitioners had stated that No. one had right to interfere with their personal relationship and since deceased was coming in the way of Petitioners having their illicit relationship, he is said to have been murdered by the Petitioners. A report came to be filed on 23.12.2009 by PC 338 stating that a dead body is found in between APMG yard and bye-pass road and on the basis of said report Cr. No. 398/2009 came to be registered against unknown persons u/s 302 of Indian Penal Code by Hassan Town P.S. A missing complaint lodged by sister’s daughter of deceased on 19.02.2010 before Belur P.S. and investigation was taken up by Belur P.S. and by that time they had received information from Hassan Town P.S. about a unknown dead body having been found about 2 months back and as such complainant was requested to identify the dead body of photograph and clothes found on the said dead body and same was identified by the complainant and as such a charge has been lodged against Petitioners by Hassan Town P.S. They have been apprehended and produced before jurisdictional court and they are in judicial custody from the date of their arrest. Petitioners having been unsuccessful in obtaining bail before jurisdictional Sessions Court are before this. Court praying for being enlarged on bail.

3. Heard Sri. Mohan Kumar, Learned Counsel appearing for Petitioners and Sri Raja Subrahnianya Bhat, learned HCGP appearing for Respondent State and perused the records made available to the court by learned HCGP. As referred to above case of prosecution is that deceased was coming in the way of Petitioners having illicit relationship and as such deceased was murdered by accused No. 1 and 2. A missing complaint came to be lodged by deceased sister’s daughter on 19.02.2010 before Belur Police Station and same came to be registered as UDR 42/2010 alleging that her uncle Puttaraju was missing since two months and requested Belur Town police to investigate. In the meanwhile Hassan Police had already registered a case in Crime No. 398/2009 on the basis of a report made by PC 338 stating that a dead body was lying between Hassan, bye pass road and. APMC yard. On the complaint made by sister’s daughter of deceased said Belur police directed the complainant to verify as to whether dead body that was found near APMC yard is that of the deceased Puttaraju. She is said to have come to Hassan Town Police Station and made enquiries and she was shown the photographs of the dead person and his belongings namely clothes that was on the dead body at the time dead body was found and she identified the person in photograph and body shown therein as also belongings of the deceased Puttaraju. After taking up investigation in Crime 398/2009 and recording statements of witnesses, accused persons were apprehended. It is to be noticed at this stage that Smt. Manjula who is CW-16 has given a statement that deceased Puttaraju knew about illicit relationship between accused persons and as such he had objected to the same and since he was objecting and coming in their way to have illicit relationship she expressed suspicion on accused No. 1 and 2 to have committed murder of Puttaraju. On the basis of said suspicion pointed out at the Petitioners further investigation is said to have been made and statement of Sri. Rangaswamy (CW-18) and Sri. Krishnaiah (CW-19) has been recorded. It is seen from the statement of CW-18 and 19 that these are the two persons who are said to have last seen deceased In the company of accused persons. It. is also stated therein that accused No. 1 along with deceased went inside Ullas Bar, Hassan at about 6 P.M. and accused No. 2 was waiting outside the bar on the said date namely 22.12.2009. Admittedly prosecution has not produced any material to show that any person from the said Ullas Bar has been examined. Thus reading of these two statements and also statement of CW-16 Smt. Manjula (sister’s daughter) it emerges that accused No. 1 and 2 are apprehended on basis of suspicion expressed by complainant. Perusal of the statements of CW-18 and CW-19 would reveal that there is inconsistency between these statements and only on the ground of suspicion Petitioners have been arrayed as accused No. 1 and 2. No. incriminating materials/property is seized from accused persons. Thus, it is for the prosecution to prove during trial, the guilt of accused persons. Admittedly charge sheet has been filed and already four witnesses have been examined on behalf of prosecution and Petitioners being permanent resident of Hassan District and owning properties, there is little chance of absconding from the place of their residence or obstruct trial. In these circumstances, I am of the considered view that Petitioners are entitled to be enlarged on bail. Hence petition is allowed. Petitioners are ordered to be released on bail on execution of bond for a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- each and two sureties for the likesum and subject to following conditions:

(i) Petitioners shall not leave the jurisdiction of Sessions Court without express permission and they shall appear before Sessions Court on all the dates of hearing.

(ii) Petitioners shall not terroise or induce the prosecution witnesses in any manner whatsoever.

(iii) If any such incident is reported prosecution is at liberty to move this Court for cancellation of bail granted.

(iv) Petitioners shall appear before jurisdictional police namely Hassan. Town Police once in 15 days i.e., 15th and 30th between 10 A.M. and 5 P.M. and mark their attendance till conclusion of trial.

Categories: Bail Matters

Tagged as: